صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

The pleasures of tafte refresh the mind after the toils of the intellect, and the labours of abstract ftudy; and they gradually raise it above the attachments of fenfe, and prepare it for the enjoyments of virtue,

So confonant is this to experience, that in the education of youth, no object has in every age appeared more important to wife men than to tincture them early with a relish for the entertainments of tafte. The tranfition is commonly made with ease from these to the discharge of the higher and more important duties of life. Good hopes may be entertained of thofe whofe minds have this liberal and elegant turn. It is favourable to many virtues. Whereas to be entirely devoid of relish for eloquence, poetry, or any of the fine arts, is justly conftrued to be an unpromifing fymptom of youth; and raises fufpicions of their being prone to low gratifications, or deftined to drudge in the more vulgar and illiberal pursuits of life.

$3.

Blair.

Improvement of TASTE connected with Improvement in VIRTUE. There are indeed few good difpofitions of any kind with which the improvement of taste is not more or lefs connected. A cultivated tafte increases fenfibility to all the tender and humane paffions, by giving them frequent exercife; while it tends to weaken the more violent and fierce emotions.

Ingenuas didiciffe fideliter artes Emollit mores, nec finit effe feros *. The elevated fentiments and high examples which poetry, eloquence, and hiftory are often bringing under our view, naturally tend to nourish in our minds public fpirit, the love of glory, contempt of external fortune, and the admiration of what is truly illuftrious and great.

I will not go so far as to fay that the improvement of taste and of virtue is the fame; or that they may always be expected to co-exist in an equal degree. More powerful correctives than tafte can apply, are neceflary for reforming the corrupt propenfities which too frequently prevail among mankind. Elegant fpeculations are fometimes found to float on the furface of the mind, while bad paffions poffefs the interior regions of the heart. At the fame time this cannot but be admitted, that the

• Thefe polifh'd arts have humaniz'd mankind, Soften'd the rude, and calm'd the boist'rous mind.

exercife of tafte is, in its native tendency, moral and purifying. From reading the most admired productions of genius, whether in poetry or profe, almost every one rifes with fome good impreffions left on his mind; and though these may not always be durable, they are at least to be ranked among the means of difpofing the heart to virtue. One thing is certain, and I fhall hereafter have occafion to illuftrate it more fully, that, without poffeffing the virtuous affections in a ftrong degree, no man can attain eminence in the fublime parts of eloquence. He must feel what a good man feels, if he expects greatly to move or to intereft mankind. They are the ardent fentiments of honour, virtue, magnanimity, and public fpirit, that only can kindle that fire of genius, and call up into the mind thofe high ideas, which attract the admiration of ages; and if this fpirit be neceffary to produce the most dif. tinguished efforts of eloquence, it must be neceffary alfo to our relishing them with Ibid. proper tafte and feeling.

§ 4. On STYLE.

It is not eafy to give a precife idea of what is meant by Style. The best definition I can give of it is, the peculiar manner in which a man expreffes his conceptions, by means of Language. It is different from mere Language or words. The words, which an author employs, may be proper and faultless; and his Style may, nevertheless, have great faults; it may be dry, or ftiff, or feeble, or affected. Style has always fome reference to an author's manner of thinking. It is a picture of the ideas which rife in his mind, and of the manner in which they rife there; and hence, when we are examining an author's compofition, it is, in many cafes, extremely difficult to feparate the Style from the fentiment. No wonder thefe two should be fo intimately connected, as Style is nothing elfe, than that fort of expreffion which our thoughts moft readily affume. Hence, different countries have been noted for peculiarities of Style, fuited to their different temper and genius. The eastern nations animated their Style with the most strong and hyberbolical figures. The Athenians, a polished and acute people, formed a Style, accurate, clear, and neat. The Afiatics, gay and loofe in their manners, affected a Style florid and diffufe. The like fort of characteristical differences are commonly remarked in the Style of the French,

the

the English, and the Spaniards. In giving the general characters of Style, it is ufual to talk of a nervous, a feeble, or a fpirited Style; which are plainly the characters of a writer's manner of thinking, as well as of exprefling himself: fo dificult it is to feparate these two things from one another. Of the general characters of Style, I am afterwards to difcourfe; but it will be neceffary to begin with examining the more fimple qualities of it; from the affemblage of which its more complex denominations, in a great meature, refult. All the qualities of a good Style may be ranged under two heads, Perfpicuity and Ornament. For all that can poffibly be required of Language is, to convey our ideas clearly to the minds of others, and, at the fame time, in fuch a drefs, as, by pleasing and interefting them, fhall moft effectually ftrengthen the impreflions which we feek to make. When both these ends are anfwered, we certainly accomplish every purpose for which we ufe Writing and Dif

courfe.

Blair.

§ 5. On PERSPICUITY. Perfpicuity, it will be readily admitted, is the fundamental quality of Style; a quality fo effential in every kind of writing, that for the want of it nothing can atone. Without this, the richeft ornaments of Style only glimmer through the dark; and puzzle, inftead of pleafing, the reader. This, therefore, must be our first object, to make our meaning clearly and fully underftood, and underflood without the leaft difficulty. "Oratio," fays Quinctilian, "debet negligenter quoque audientibus effe aperta; ut in animum audientis, ficut fol in oculos, etiamfi in eum non intendatur, occurrat. Quare, non folum ut intelligere pofit, fed ne omnino poflit non intelligere, curandum +." If we are obliged to follow a writer with much care, to paufe, and to read over his fentences a fecond time, in order to comprehend them fully, he will never please us

66

[blocks in formation]

long. Mankind are too indolent to relish fo much labour. They may pretend to admire the author's depth after they have difcovered his meaning; but they will feldom be inclined to take up his work a fecond time.

Authors fometimes plead the difficulty of their fubject, as an excufe for the want of Perfpicuity. But the excufe can rarely, if ever, be admitted. For whatever a man conceives clearly, that it is in his power, if he will be at the trouble, to put into diftinct propofitions, or to exprefs clearly to others: and upon no fubject ought any man to write, where he cannot think clearly. His ideas, indeed, may, very excufably, be on fome fubjects incomplete or inadequate; but ftill, as far as they go, they ought to be clear; and, wherever this is the cafe, Perfpicuity in expreffing them is always attainable. The obfcurity which reigns fo much among many metaphyfical writers, is, for the most part, owing to the indiftinctnefs of their own conceptions. They fee the object but in a confufed light; and, of course, can never exhibit it in a clear one to others.

Perfpicuity in writing, is not to be confidered as merely a fort of negative virtue, or freedom from defect. It has higher merit: it is a degree of pofitive beauty. We are pleafed with an author, we confider him as deferving praife, who frees us from all fatigue of fearching for his meaning; who carries us through his fubject without any embarraffment or confufion; whofe ftyle flows always like a limpid ftream, where we fee to the very bottom.

Ibid.

§ 6. On PURITY and PROPRIETY.

Purity and Propriety of Language, are often ufed indifcriminately for each other; and, indeed, they are very nearly allied. A diftinction, however, cbtains between them. Purity, is the ufe of fuch words, and fuch constructions, as being to the idiom of the Language which we speak; in oppofition to words and phrafes that are imported from other Languages, or that are obfolete, or new-coined, or ufed without proper authority. Propriety is the felection of fuch words in the Language, as the best and most established ufage has appropriated to thofe ideas which we intend to exprefs by them. It implies the correct and happy application of them, according to that ufage, in oppofition to vulgarifms, or low expreffions; and to words

U

and

and phrafes, which would be lefs fignificant of the ideas that we mean to convey. Style may be pure, that is, it may all be ftrictly English, without Scotticifms or Gallicifms, or ungramatical, irregular expreffions of any kind, and may, nevertheless, be deficient in propriety. The words may be ill-chofen; not adapted to the fubject, nor fully expreffive of the author's fenfe. He has taken all his words and phrafes from the general mafs of English Language; but he has made his felection among these words unhappily. Whereas Style cannot be proper without being alfo pure; and where both Purity and Propriety meet, befides making Style perfpicuous, they alfo render it graceful. There is no standard, either of Purity or of Propriety, but the practice of the belt writers and speakers in the country.

When I mentioned obfolete or newcoined words as incongruous with Purity of Style, it will be easily understood, that fome exceptions are to be made. On certain occafions, they may have grace, Poetry admits of greater latitude than profe, with respect to coining, or, at least, new-compounding words; yet, even here, this liberty fhould be used with a fparing hand. In profe, fuch innovations are more hazardous, and have a worse effect. They are apt to give Style an affected and conceited air; and fhould never be ventured upon except by fuch, whofe eftablished reputation gives them fome degree of dictatorial power over Language.

The introduction of foreign and learned words, unless where neceflity requires them, fhould always be avoided. Barren Languages may need fuch affiftances; but ours is not one of thefe. Dean Swift, one of our most correct writers, valued himself much on ufing no words but fuch as were of native growth: and his Lan guage may, indeed, be confidered as a ftandard of the ftricteft Purity and Propriety in the choice of words. At prefent, we feem to be departing from this ftandard. A multitude of Latin words have, of late, been poured in upon us. On fome occafions, they give an appearance of elevation and dignity to Style. But often, alfo, they render it ftiff and forced: and, in general, a plain native Style, as it is more intelligible to all readers, fo, by a proper management of words, it may be made equally trong and expreffive with this Latinized English. Blair.

§ 7. On PRECISION. The exact import of Precision may be drawn from the etymology of the word. It comes from "precidere," precidere," to cut off: it imports retrenching all superfluities, and pruning the expreffion fo, as to exhibit neither more nor less than an exact copy of his idea who ufes it. I obferved before, that it is often difficult to feparate the qualities of Style from the qualities of Thought; and it is found fo in this inftance. For in order to write with Precifion, though this be properly a quality of Style, one muft poffefs a very confiderable degree of dif tinctnefs and accuracy in his manner of thinking.

The words, which a man uses to express his ideas, may be faulty in three refpects; They may either not exprefs that idea which the author intends, but fome other which only refembles, or is a-kin to it; or, they may exprefs that idea, but not quite fully and completely; or, they may exprefs it, together with fomething more than he intends. Precision ftands opposed to all these three faults; but chiefly to the laft. In an author's writing with propriety, his being free from the two former faults feems implied. The words which he ufes are proper; that is, they exprefs that idea which he intends, and they exprefs it fully; but to be Precife, fignifies, that they exprefs that idea, and no more. There is nothing in his words which introduces any foreign idea, any fuperfluous, unfeafonable acceffory, fo as to mix it confufedly with the principal object, and thereby to render our conception of that object loofe and indiftinét. This requires a writer to have, himself, a very clear apprehenfion of the object he means to prefent to us; to have laid faft held of it in his mind; and never to waver in any one view he takes of it; a perfection to which, indeed, few writers attain. Ibid.

§ 8. On the Ufe and Importance of
PRECISION.

The ufe and importance of Precision, may be deduced from the nature of the human mind. It never can view, clearly and diftinctly, above one object at a time, If it must look at two or three together, efpecially objects among which there is refemblance or connection, it finds itself confufed and embarraffed. It cannot

clearly

tlearly perceive in what they agree, and in what they differ. Thus, were any object, fuppofe fome animal, to be prefented to me, of whofe ftructure I wanted to form a distinct notion, I would defire all its trappings to be taken off, I would require it to be brought before me by itself, and to ftand alone, that there might be nothing to diftract my attention. The fame is the cafe with words. If, when you would inform me of your meaning, you alfo tell me more than what conveys it; if you join foreign circumftances to the principal object; if, by unneceffarily varying the expreffion, you fhift the point of view, and make me fee fometimes the object itself, and fometimes another thing that is connected with it; you thereby oblige me to look on feveral objects at once, and I lofe fight of the principal. You load the animal you are fhowing me with fo many trappings and collars, and bring fo many of the fame fpecies before me, fomewhat resembling, and yet fomewhat differing, that I fee none of them clearly.

This forms what is called a Loofe Style: and is the proper oppofite to Precifion. It generally arifes from ufing a fuperfluity of words. Feeble writers employ a mul

titude of words, to make themselves underflood, as they think, more diftinctly; and they only confound the reader. They are fenfible of not having caught the precife expreffion, to convey what they would fignify; they do not, indeed, conceive their own meaning very precifely themfelves; and, therefore, help it out, as they can, by this and the other word, which may, as they fuppofe, fupply the defect, and bring you fomewhat nearer to their idea: they are always going about it, and about it, but never juft hit the thing. The image, as they fet it before you, is always feen double; and no double image is diftin&t. When an author tells me of his hero's courage in the day of battle, the expreflion is precife, and I underftand it fully. But if, from the defire of multiplying words, he will needs praife his courage and fortitude; at the moment he joins thefe words together, my idea begins to waver. He means to exprefs one quality more frongly; but he is, in truth, expreffing two. Courage refifts danger; fortitude fupports pain. The occafion of exerting each of thefe qualities is different; and being led to think of both together, when only one of them fhould be in my view, my view is rendered unfteady, and my conception of the object indiftinct.

From what I have faid, it appears that an author may, in a qualified fenfe, be perfpicuous, while yet he is far from being precife. He uses proper words, and proper arrangement: he gives you the idea as clear as he conceives it himself; and fo far he is perfpicuous: but the ideas are not very clear in his own mind: they are loofe and general; and, therefore, canno be expreffed with Precifion. All fubjects do not equally require Precifion. It is fufficient, on many occafions, that we have a general view of the meaning. The fubject, perhaps, is of the known and familiar kind; and we are in no hazard of mistaking the fenfe of the author, though every word which he uses be not precise and exact. Blair.

$9. The Caufes of a Loofe STYLE. The great fource of a Loofe Style, in ufe of thofe words termed Synonymous. oppofition to Precifion, is the injudicious They are called Synonymous, because they agree in expreffing one principal idea: but, for the moit part, if not always, they exprefs it with fome diverfity in the circumftances. They are varied by fome acceffory idea which every word intro

duces, and which forms the distinction be there two words that convey precifely the tween them. Hardly, in any Language, are fame idea; a perfon thoroughly converfant ways be able to obferve fomething that in the propriety of the Language, will alferent thades of the fame colour, an acdiftinguishes them. As they are like difadvantage, by ufing them fo as to heighten curate writer can employ them to great and finish the picture which he gives us. He fupplies by one, what was wanting in the other, to the force, or to the luftre of But in order to this end, he must be exthe image which he means to exhibit. tremely attentive to the choice which he

makes of them. For the bulk of writers

are very apt to confound them with each other: and to employ them carelessly, merely for the fake of filling up a period, or of rounding and diverfifying the Language, as if the fignification were exactly

the fame, while, in truth, it is not. Hence a certain mift, and indiftinétnefs, is unwarily thrown over Style. Ibid.

§ 10. On the general Characters of STYLE.

That different fubjects require to be treated of in different forts of Style, is a pofition to obvious, that I shall not stay to illuftrate it. Every one fees that Treatifes of Philofophy, for inftance, ought not to

be compofed in the fame Style with Orations. Every one fees alfo, that different parts of the fame compofition require a variation in the Style and manner. In a fermon, for instance, or any harangue, the application or peroration admits of more ornament, and requires more warmth, than the didactic part. But what I mean at prefent to remark is, that, amidft this variety, we ftill expect to find, in the compofitions of any one man, fome degree of uniformity or confiftency with himself in manner; we expect to find fome predominant character of Style impreffed on all his writings, which fhail be fuited to, and fhall mark, his particular genius and turn of mind. The orations in Livy differ much in Style, as they ought to do, from the reft of his hiftory. The fame is the cafe with thofe in Tacitus. Yet both in Livy's orations, and in thofe of Tacitus, we are able clearly to trace the diftinguifhing manner of each hiftorian: the magnificent fulness of the one, and the fententious concifenefs of the other. The "Lettres Perfanes," and "L'Efprit de Loix," are the works of the fame author. They required very different compofition furely, and accordingly they differ widely; yet ftill we fee the fame hand. Wherever there is real and native genius, it gives a determination to one kind of Style rather than another. Where nothing of this appears; where there is no marked nor peculiar character in the compofitions of any author, we are apt to infer, not without reafon, that he is a vulgar and trivial author, who writes from imitation, and not from the impulfe of original genius. As the moft celebrated painters are known by their hand, fo the best and most original writers are known and diftinguished, throughout all their works, by their Style and peculiar manner. This will be found to hold almoft without exception. Blair.

§ 11. On the Auftere, the Florid, and the

Middle STYLE.

The ancient Critics attended to thefe general characters of Style which we are now to confider. Dionyfius of Halicarnaffus divides them into three kinds; and calls them the Auftere, the Florid, and the Middle. By the Auftere, he means a Style diftinguished for ftrength and firmnefs, with a neglect of fmoothness and ornament; for examples of which, he gives Pindar and fchylus among the Poets, and Thucydides among the Profe writers. By the Florid, he means, as the name in

dicates, a Style ornamented, flowing, and fweet; refting more upon numbers and grace, than ftrength; he inftances Hefiod, Sappho, Anacreon, Euripides, and principally Ifocrates. The Middle kind is the just mean between these, and comprehends the beauties of both; in which clafs he places Homer and Sophocles among the Poets: in Profe, Herodotus, Demofthenes, Plato, and (what feems ftrange) Aristotle. This must be a very wide class indeed, which comprehends Plato and Aristotle under one article as to Style*. Cicero and Quintilian make alfo a threefold divifion of Style, though with refpect to dif ferent qualities of it; in which they are followed by most of the modern writers on Rhetoric; the Simplex, Tenue, or Subtile; the Grave, or Vehemens; and the Medium, or temperatum genus dicendi. But thefe divifions, and the illuftrations they give of them, are fo loofe and general, that they cannot advance us much in our ideas of Style. I fhall endeavour to be a little more particular in what I have to fay on this fubject.

Ibid.

§ 12. On the Concife STYLE. One of the first and most obvious diftictions of the different kinds of Style, is what arifes from an author's spreading out his thoughts more or lefs. This diftinction forms what are called the Diffufe and the Concife Styles. A concife writer compreffes his thought into the feweft poffible words; he feeks to employ none but fuch as are most expreffive; he lops off, as redundant, every expreffion which does not add fomething material to the fenfe. Ornament he does not reject; he may be lively and figured; but his ornament is intended for the fake of force rather than grace. He never gives you the fame thought twice. He places it in the light which appears to him the moft ftriking; but if you do not apprehend it well in that light, you need not expect to find it in any other. His fentences are arranged with compactnefs and ftrength, rather than with cadence and harmony. The utmost precifion is ftudied in them; and they are commonly defigned to fuggeit more to the reader's imagination than they directly expreís. Ibid.

[blocks in formation]
« السابقةمتابعة »